Would you get the Nikkor 35mm 1.4 for $1,600 or the Sigma 35 1.4 for $800.

Clearly the price is a huge gap but what I am wondering is why? Their are amazing reviews on the sigma and many claim that the sigma is even better than the cannon version of this lens when tested side by side.

What would you get?

Having owned both..easy...the Sigma. Priced the same? Again, the Sigma. What advantages the Nikon may have, flare for example, are quite subtle compared to the advantages of the Sigma imo. Factor in price...it's a no-brainer. Then again, due to the Sigma, you can pick up a mint condition, used Nikon 35G for about $1100. now....and price still falling.

It's clear to *me* that Sigma, with their "Art" series of lenses, intends to shake up the market. I wish them success